tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX News January 16, 2010 2:00pm-2:30pm EST
and stay, fox is next as we continue our coverage of your money, and the ongoing developments in haiti. that's coming up. >> a frantic search is still on in haiti as rescue efforts begin turning into recovery efforts. now, a new worry could widespread disease cause even more death? we are going to go live to haiti in a few minutes, but first, american businesses are rushing millions in aid to help these victims, many of them the same companies being vilified in the press and washington as nothing, but greedy grubs. is that fair? hi everybody i'm david asman, welcome to forbes on fox here with us today steve forbes, victoria barrett, rich michael, and neil wineberg and quentin hardy. steven is it time to give credit where credit is due to the companies? >> i think the companies are doing right and it's prer and i hope we make use of companies that are good at logistics, fed ex, wal-mart, handling large supplies quickly.
don't expect thanks for it, just as we did not get thanks for what the military did in the tsunami five years ago in the pacific, did a fantastic job and didn't help the image of the united states. it's right to do so-and-so we do it. >> we're the most generous, our private companies and corporations go out of their way to help the poor and devastated. >> and i'm glad they're doing so once again, you know, david, normally i am not for corporate charitable giving because after all, shareholders own a company and shareholders are rarely consulted on corporate giving, but this is a humanitarian disaster and calls for an exception, the one thing i would like to see is that the credit is widespread. we the people are the shareholder of this company. i think what this demonstrates is not just corporations, but the american big heart. and i, you know, maybe this sounds a little bit too mathematical, but i would love to see people get tax deductions if their shareholders in these
companies that give. they should get a prorated way to deduct their charitable giving from taxes. >> jon: quentin, what do you think? >> i think at times like this, it is important to remember, well, matthew 6-2 from the sermon on the mound. when giving do not send a trumpet before you. don't announce this or public size this. it's something that's just good to do. now, corporations should and you know, do disclose what they give away. so the shareholders can decide whether or not they want to be owners in that kind of a company. personally, i think that's a good thing. but the world jumps in at times like this and that's a reminder of our common humanity as with the tsunami and that's a good thing. quentin brings up a good point. at the same time nobody is really bragging about this, but again, it does show that corporations and individuals in those corporations do have a heart? >> well, yeah, they do and what i've been amazed by is that many of the gifts so far from corporate america have been in
cash. they haven't been, you know, these company's products, if you think about this from a granding point of view, it would be much better to give your products and hope that targeting a customer base in haiti, but they're giving cash because that's what the countries needs right now and doesn't necessarily get them the kind of branding pr points that they would otherwise get. they're doing this from the heart, that's the right thing to do. >> and they're giving in kind contributions and western union offering to waive the fees on a lot of money transfers and et cetera, and also give services and goods as well as cash. >> i think as a crisis times, if you have a company like that or home depot building supplies, it's appropriate for them to give where others can't. corporations shouldn't be giving, let individuals, they are the share oerldz and owners of the company and giving welt. if you're talking about the financial institutions beat on by washington, if they give and do so in a public way, are they
doing that to humanitarian or-- >> would you make an exception? generally i understand your rule, but this is an exceptional case. >> no, i think they should give this wealth back to the individual who own these companies and let us make the decisions. >> what do you think, mike. >> i think the companies have to do it, david, because they have the resources, the wherewithal, they can manage the logistics much better and much faster than individuals can. and obviously, in this type of a disaster, we need to get aid there as fast as possible. and as efficiently as possible. and as steve mentioned, corporations here can do it much better. o even when we had the levees break in new orleans the corporations came to the aid the best and fast way. >> steve, might this put a damper between sniping and business, each one accusing the other of being bad boys. >> i hope so and i hope it shows what makes companies success vm.
having people cooperate. webs of cooperation. usage lod huge logistical feats. >> obviously, money is important, but right now, it's just getting equipment in there. that's more important than anything to save lives. is it conceivable that maybe companies could go one step further and shift all their resources, at least momentarily for the next couple of weeks to getting stuff in there? >> well, as steve pointed out, that's where some of these companies like ups and fed ex and american airlines, and wal-mart have not just deep pockets, but they have logistical prowess, airplanes, stuff that's really needed right now. abbott laboratories is donating drugs because there's probably going to be an outbreak of disease, you know, a second wave effect is going to be even more crushing. so, you know, i think this-- the minister rick warren said these huge problems taken all-out effort by three entities, government, the
private sector, and nonprofits. and i want to see everybody in on this problem. >> that's a good place to end it, thank you very much, guys, breaking news coming out of haiti. we're going to go right to fox news central for the latest. >> thanks, david. i'm jamie colby. there's a situation 0 on the ground, grows worse by the hour. relief workers are very concerned that unless food and water and supplies arrive quickly, port-au-prince will descend into lawlessness. as haiti's prime minister says the death toll of 100,000 may be the minimum. vice-president joe biden holding a news conference on the haiti relief effort a short time ago from homestead air reserve base in florida. phil keating is live in miami with the very latest. phil, what are you hearing? >> well, the vice-president as well as secretary janet napolitano, head of homeland security department, they first went to miami's little haiti neighborhood to meet with activists reaffirming the united
stat states' pledge to that community. to provide help, to provide support and vice-president biden committed the united states to rebuilding haiti long after this earthquake leaves the newspapers. then they met with military personnel as well as relief workers down at the air base and it was there that the secretary of homeland security made it very clear that what is really needed right now from all americans is quote, cold hard cash and charity websites are available if you go to whitehouse.org on the internet. jamie. >> phil, thank you, if you'd like to support the relief effort it's as easy as your cell phone. just text the word haiti to this number 90999. that's 90999. and your money will automatically go to the red cross for disaster relief. you can also log on to our website, foxnews.com for a number of other relief organizations. i'm jamie colby. keep is right here on fox for live coverage on all the relief efforts in haiti.
all of our correspondents are on the ground as you see phil monitoring in miami and i'll be here in new york, or go to our website, more forbes on fox after this break. i'm jamie colby. host: does charlie daniels play a mean fiddle? ♪ fiddle music charlie:hat's how you do it son. vo: geico. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance.
the health care in america at large. republican scott brown says it's the people's seat not kennedy's seat is against is. he's ahead in one poll, and democrat martha coakley is for it. remember, this is the nation's most pro democratic state and already has its own form of health care reform and rich says voters there are telling d.c. it doesn't work there. rich? >> well, it's a disaster, it's a fiscal train wreck, dr. david grasser with the manhattan institute for the canadian physician who has looked at the debacle in canada concluded since 2006 when this passed insurance premiums have gone up on the double digit basis every year, and the whole system is 85% over budget so it's unsustainable. the massachusetts voters know it and that's why brown could pull off the upset on tuesday. >> so it doesn't work in massachusetts and it won't work here, that's what the voters are telling? >> well, i don't know, coakley had a 30 point lead a month ago
and she lost it and fell apart after health care already passed because brown, quite rightly, started making this people's seat choice. he said it's not the kennedy seat, it's the people's seat. he's not running on health care. did you see this guy on cavuto on wednesday? he said he likes the massachusetts health care, it's covering all, but 2% of the population. he's not going to go to washington and change things. you know who i wish was running? dennis kucinich. he said let every state try something different, let them experiment. we'll see what's working. why don't we try that. >> dennis kucinich who does want the government to take over insurance entirely. democrats outnumber republicans 3-1 in massachusetts, but this guy is in a dead heat. >> he's made it clear against what is being done in washington and should go back to the drawing board and the referendum is on. and rich is right, the numbers don't work. >> costs 800 million dollars a year for the health care way
above what they expect it had to cost. >> yes, and it has not done what it's been advertised to do so it's another example, overspending, overregulating and over lawyering, when brown says let's start all over again. people say, yes, why rush into this? >> you know who really likes massachusetts health care and the national plan is the insurance industry, they're the ones throwing fundraisers for martha coakley and steve likes to call them useful idiots on this front. i think you've got to take them at their word. they think we're going to make a lot of money with reform. massachusetts's mistake-- >> hold on, is that good for the nation if the insurance companies make a lot of money and the government. >> stocks are going up too. >> i think that's the problem with the massachusetts plan they passed the mandate and left the insurance in the hand of the same for-profit companies who's made the problem-- >> i think we need a public option, if you have a private insurance company you should have it and if you don't-- >> even more government. vicky what do you think? >> look, i think this is larger than the health care debate. i think a lot of americans are fed up with the change they
thought that was coming to washington. and instead we've had a lot more of the same. we don't have transparency and lobbyists are running the show. i think that's what this is about and you're also seeing this in or gone-- oregon, not likely to pass a tax hike. i think this is a turning point people saying, hey, we need a different plan, we need changes and look different than the change we thought we were getting. >> rich, it's ironic as mike pointed out, you have the insurance companies and pharmaceuticals lobbying for more government help. well, obama care is all about is figuring which politically unrepresented group can be stuck with the bill. now, remember, the massachusetts may be a liberal state, but every once a generation they rise up. it was the people of massachusetts who rose up against school bussing, in the 1970's and they're going to do so again on health care. >> well, quentin could we turn the tide nationally, that's the question? >> they're rising up and voting
and favoring a guy who voted for massachusetts health care. and who brags about how great the massachusetts system is. and he's going to go to washington and maybe throw a wretch in the works, but he's not talking about the fundamental problem in our health care, which is we reward insurers and hospitals for tests and procedures, we do not reward for good efficient outcome. >> well, and steve we've got to remind folks, it was the republican governor who put this plan in place in the first place. >> and that's why myth romney has an albatross going into 2012. he's got to explain what about the mandate on the federal level-- >> does he admit it doesn't work now or serious problems? >> he blames the democrats and said i would have done it right which that's the problem. the wrong people get it. you don't want to have to have it done so don't do it in the first place, especially massachusetts. >> there is an irony here in that if coakley loses and he goes to the senate. that could actually speed, that could make the senate plan lost because all the house would have to do is pass exactly the senate
plan at this point. this has already passed the senate. >> yes, but one of the things helping them in the race is the prospect if he won the election, his swearing in would be delayed because they don't want him throwing a monkey wrench in these works and people are saying, what's an election for, if you're playing those kind of games. >> victoria, do you think that massachusetts is just the beginning, that is it is going to be a bellwether and the way that it goes is the way that individual states all over the country are going to go? >> potentially. very potentially, i mean, i want to go back to a point that rich made which is what we're seeing is the health care plan out of washington is just a series of who gets to play favorites. and we saw this with the administration coming out and saying they're going to tax expensive health insurance plans and oh, some union plans fall under that cat gorization, so it sounds like it's not going to affect the unions now, this is the kind of stuff that american voters hate. >> exactly. >> and i think that massachusetts-- >> it's the insiders getting the special deals, whether we're
talking health care, cap and trade or the bailouts themselves and it is the people, steve, the people's revenge right now, no? >> well, it is. it's the people's seat. it's the people's revenge and, you know, one person, the change of one senate seat is hugely symbolic because you've got about 30 members, democrats in the house, now, who are waivverg on this reconciliation through the house and all it takes is about three or four to peel off and the house no longer has the majority for this plan. >> steve, if in fact the democrats lose this seat, does it mean the end of health care, they don't have the 60 votes. >> they're going to find a way to ram it through and not going to give up on it and i think it raises the odds to stop the thing and even if it passes it's going to make the courts say we are going to throw this out on constitutional grounds. >> last word from steve forbes, did you hear this the white house the way it counts stlus
job. create and save, that's out. any is in. any. more fuzzy math. but first the ultimate tax smackdown, a government plan to raise money from ultimate fighting that all taxpayers may end up loving. [ female announcer ] the only thing better than seafood is enjoying it together. and right now, a complete seafood dinner for two is just $29.99 at red lobster.
you both get a fresh salad and irresistible cheddar bay biscuits... two entrees from a menu of classic favorites and new creations. and your choice of either an appetizer or a dessert to share. your favorite seafood with your favorite person. just $29.99. for a limited time at red lobster. dominates heartburn. 24/7... including the eight hours you spend with your eyes closed. prilosec otc. heartburn gone. power on.
>> it's great news tore everybody, i think it should be up to people in terms of whether they want to see ultimate fighting and smoke pot and shouldn't be the choice of the government to tell them what to do. let's face it, if it's going to be taxed. >> gwen, good for bad for taxpayers. >> bad. when you think about outcomes think about intentions, smoking dope or watching men beat each other to paste sounds like a libertarian outcome. the fact of the matter is the government is doing this for the tax revenues. what does that mean? they don't want to actually step up to their deficit. they don't want to change their behavior. so, next, maybe we make it okay to sell one of your kidneys if it can be taxed or sell a baby if it can be taxed or who knows what. that's not libertarian or small government. that's new sources of tax revenue which doesn't change the fundamental things government has to do. cut entitlement. pensions to employees and gross military spending and cut medicare, you know, all of that
stuff. well, evelyn, there are clearly limits. we don't want to go to selling babies, but is this okay, what we're hearing? >> i think this is okay. what the governments are not operating under the assumption that this is the only thing they're going to do and it'd be great if we could, obviously, ban all of these things and that would be fine and people saw it, but honestly that's not going to happen. we are going to have to make some money off the markets and why not? if these governments are cash strapped like in california, like in washington, why not think creatively and think of the new markets and if the public is ready for it and if they think they can regulate responsibly, why not? >> steve, the late great editor of forbes magazine jim michaels use today say he's all for the libertarian solutions for legalization of prostitution and at least that's an honest way to make money as opposed to politicians. >> if they get this money they'll spend and spend more and next thing we'll have is big aam i. the license fees you can collect from multiple marriages at the same time.
how about bringing back gl gladiator games from rome. legalized murder, don't like your spouse. >> i don't think jim would go that far. >> and have a fight-- >> all the time. >> actually i used to work under him so no i did not fight him. >> what do you say. >> i never thought i'd see it quentin is for small government and mike is for smoking pot. >> and the system that we have which tells us some things are good, you know, get a tax break for a big house, but don't get one for a second house. within this bizarre system we have, this is probably a good idea. let people do what they want. better to get rid of the system and put in a flat tax and i'm sure steve would agree with me. >> absolutely. >> and start all over. >> i'll tell you one thing. >> the usage applied, no? >> i tell you one thing, i'm for legalization because i think the incarceration system is just to build up the prison industrial complex. decriminalization, authentic use for cancer patients who need it
and i tell you one thing. >> why not tax it? >> if this passes-- because it's perpetuating big government not make them step up to the deficit. intention matters. >> i love it. >> but if this passes i'd rather be in california where we smoke dope than new york where we are going to beat each other to death. >> mike, i got to tell you one case i'm with glenn 100%. >> i think the first usc fight between quentin and i-- >> he's nor lower government. >> you can't fight. >> wait a minute, why can't we have the legalization of marijuana, the looegalization a smaller government. why can't we do these things. >> steve, is there a marriage? >> no, if you want to legalize an activity for some reason, debate it, but in terms of government it's too big and anything that feeds the beast is bad for us. >> evelyn is steve convinces you, at all? >> if the markets are going to exist, legalize them and skim money off of it and there's a
risk we could go too far with it, but i think that people are going to be more responsible here, we're not going to legalize murders or crack or cocaine. >> it should not be up to the government. >> how about multiple marriages, we have a series on it. >> i think we have a rebuttal steve can't come back on. >> lower tax rates bring in more government revenue, you're for lower tax rates. >> i'm for lower tax rates, one tax rates. >> one tax at a time. our golden globe awards that may make you so much money that avatar's huge blue creatures will be green with envy. [ male announcer ] a bad cold hits your whole body. alka-seltzer plus liquid gels rush relief everywhere you need it. it's the most complete relief you can get in a liquid gel, so you feel better, fast.
>> moneymaker avatar is up for multiple golden globe awards. if you want to make money, check out the award winning stocks. netflix. >> a smart company of course in dvd's and now the leader in online video screaming so i think there's a lot of growth here. >> evelyn. >> a lot of momentum in '09, but not so much in 2010 you'll see that the pop they got from blockbuster closing is not going to be really that good. >> evelyn is into drugs. >> i'm into drugs, not marijuana though, i'm into teva pharmaceuticals, greater share in america in the markets and profit margins are growing. >> teva is a great company. >> i know, but i'm nervous. the funds the biggest holders like alliance is selling so i'm cautious. >> you're going back to a big media company. >> golden globes, vi com, i'm going to capitalize on the buzz. >> do you like it, vicky.
>> no, i don't. i'm not big on content companies right now because i think that the business models have yet to be disrupted and figured out. and so, it's not a good pick. >> what do you think of vicky's comments. she hasn't seen the movie yet obviously. vicky what do you have for us. >> fair enough, fair enough. well, i like the companies that benefit from all the content by selling you devices to watch it on. apple, a new tablet and can i get a copy that have photo? i like that, i like that. >> you got it. but what about apple, neil, it's gone up tremendously up to over 200. >> apple has had ups and downs over the years and right now eating dust with the e-reader and i think their pipeline is getting a little empty here. >> vicky, what about the fact it's already had this tremendous run up from 78 to over 200? >> that's the thing about great tech companies. you could have said that last year, too, i mean, apple still has the innovation and they'll still do well. >> keep it on apple.